The selection is so made that at the same time the question of authenticity must be considered. In every case, even in the case of unauthenticity, i.e. when we cannot ascribe the text to Jesus, it is Jesus himself who gains by this.
~Ernst Fuchs
This is a little scary. It is OK to make up things and attribute them to Jesus?
ReplyDeleteGranted, our interpolators must have felt that. But it asks for very strong condemnation indeed.
What does Fuchs mean? Does he mean that when we find that some things were said about Jesus, do not seem to be from an historical Jesus, then therefore:
ReplyDelete1) Having thus eliminated ahistorical material, this helps us see the real historical Jesus? Or does he mean the opposite? That ...
2) When we read even interpolated and in some ways inauthentic things about Jesus, this can be good? Since those things were improvements in some cases? Or add to the "Christ of Faith"?
If Fuchs believes that things said about Jesus in the Bible are solely "linguistic," and not factual realities, this might suggest that even very, very literary inventions and made-up things have the same - or even higher - status, than say, hard physical facts or data.